(Evidence Provided Below in Appendix)

Appendix  

As a beneficiary of an estate and trust administered by Neuberger Berman Trust, I am impacted by Neuberger Berman Trust taking kickbacks and  other unseemly practices.  You may wish to review my experiences and Neuberger Berman Trust's tactics.
​

A copy of what I have named the "Kickback Policy" promulgated by Neuberger Berman Trust Company is included herein .  This "Kickback Policy" is in the form of a document, Neuberger Berman Trust Chief Fiduciary Officer Joseph F. Collins III  demanded I sign as a condition of receiving portions of my inheritance.   When Joseph F. Collins III  made that demand, I felt coerced. The Neuberger Berman Trust “ Kickback policy,” if signed, waives its fiduciary duty, and authorizes Neuberger Berman Trust to take kickbacks of all nature, in addition to its regular fee.  The “ kickback document”  authorizes Neuberger Berman Trust to employ money entrusted to it in all kinds of risky sophisticated financial transactions, with the risk to be fully assumed by the customer.   Neuberger Berman Trust’s "kickback policy" empowers it to appoint a “Co- trustee,” without requiring anyone’s permission, and relieves Neuberger Berman Trust of  responsibility for the actions of the Co-Trustee. 

The Perils of Neuberger Berman Trust Taking Kickbacks and Abrogating its Fiduciary Duties  

Neuberger Berman Trust demanded I sign its "kickback policy" as a condition of funding my trust.  This document authorizes Neuberger Berman Trust to take all manners of "kickbacks," in addition to the annual percentage it takes as "trust administrator." I refused to sign.  Joseph F. Collins III forced me to wait in limbo while Neuberger Berman Trust decided if it would fund my trust.  Eventually the trust was partially funded.  It appeared that holding back my money was a tactic to force me to sign.  Is Neuberger Berman Trust taking "kickbacks" anyway, even though I did not agree?  It appears taking 'kickbacks" is routine at Neuberger Berman Trust Company.  ("Kickback" may be a legal term.  As a layman, I know of now better word to describe the activities Neuberger Berman attempted to force me to sign off on.)

When a fiduciary such as Neuberger Berman Trust takes "kickbacks" from a 3rd Party with whom it places funds it holds in trust, it puts those funds at risk.  A scenario is created where safety and return are not necessarily paramount as they should be.  Is it not fraudulent to state to a court that the trustee agrees to take a fee based on an annual percentage of the estate when, in effect, the trustee is accepting "kickbacks" to juice the return?  Is the court supposed to know about the "kickbacks" because they may be commonplace?  Probate courts are liberal with fee-seeking attorneys and trustees.  Does that make the "kickback" practices of Neuberger Berman Trust acceptable?

The old Neuberger Berman Trust went bankrupt doing the same types of sophisticated financial shenanigans authorized in the Neuberger Berman Trust  "kickback policy."  For Neuberger Berman Trust Company, a trustee with fiduciary duties, to expose a trust to excessive risk and double dealing is reprehensible and should be found unacceptable.

Neuberger Berman Trust not only takes "kickbacks," its Chief Fiduciary Officer, Joseph F. Collins III demanded I sign the attached document authorizing Neuberger Berman Trust to accept "kickbacks."